borgqueens

[borgqueens]

While Saudi Arabia celebrates being awarded the Fifa men’s World Cup and meticulously promotes itself on the global stage as reformed, women who have dared to publicly call for more rights and freedoms have faced house arrest, jail and exile." Ladies everytime someone mentions Saudi Arabia doing something like getting to host the Fifa men’s World Cup remind everyone of the Dar al-Reaya

Tom Levitt and Deepa Parent Wed 28 May 2025

Ayoung woman wearing a black abaya is pictured in a city in north-west Saudi Arabia standing precariously on a second-floor window ledge. A second photograph shows a group of men escorting her down with the help of a crane.

The woman’s identity is unknown, but she was allegedly being held at one of Saudi Arabia’s notoriously secretive “jails” for women banished by their families or husbands for disobedience, extramarital sexual relations or being absent from home.

It was a rare glimpse of the plight of hundreds or more girls and young women believed to be held in such facilities, where they are “rehabilitated” so they can return to their families.

Speaking out in public or sharing footage of these “care homes”, or Dar al-Reaya, has become impossible in a country where voices on women’s rights appear to have been silenced. But over the past six months, the Guardian has gathered testimony about what it is like inside these institutions, described as “hellish”, with weekly floggings, forced religious teachings and no visits or contact with the outside world.

Conditions are reported to be so bad that there have been several cases of suicide or attempted suicide. The women can spend years locked up, unable to leave without the permission of their family or a male guardian.

“Every girl growing up in Saudi knows about Dar al-Reaya and how awful it is. It’s like hell. I tried to end my life when I found out I was going to be taken to one. I knew what happened to women there and thought ‘I can’t survive it’,” says one young Saudi woman who later managed to flee into exile.

Maryam Aldossari, a Saudi activist based in London, says: “A young girl or woman will stay in there for as long as it takes for her to accept the rules.”

A woman stands on window ledge, allegedly trying to escape one of Saudi Arabia ‘care homes’ and is then apparently helped down by a group of men.

While Saudi Arabia celebrates being awarded the Fifa men’s World Cup and meticulously promotes itself on the global stage as reformed, women who have dared to publicly call for more rights and freedoms have faced house arrest, jail and exile. Activists say the country’s care homes are one of the regime’s lesser-known tools for controlling and punishing women, and want them to be abolished.

It is a prison, not a care home, as they like to call it. They call each other by numbers. ‘Number 35, come here’

Sarah Al-Yahia, campaigner

Saudi officials have described the care homes, which were set up across the country in the 1960s, as providing “shelter for girls accused or convicted of various crimes” and say they are used to “rehabilitate the female inmates” with the help of psychiatrists “in order to return them to their family”.

But Sarah Al-Yahia, who started a campaign to abolish the care homes, has spoken to a number of girls who describe an abusive regime, with inmates subjected to strip-searches and

But Sarah Al-Yahia, who started a campaign to abolish the care homes, has spoken to a number of girls who describe an abusive regime, with inmates subjected to strip-searches and virginity tests on arrival and given sedatives to put them to sleep.

“It is a prison, not a care home, as they like to call it. They call each other by numbers. ‘Number 35, come here.’ When one of the girls shared her family name, she got lashes. If she doesn’t pray, she gets lashes. If she is found alone with another woman she gets lashes and is accused of being a lesbian. The guards gather and watch when the girls are being lashed.”

Yahia, who is now 38 and lives in exile, says her parents had threatened to send her to Dar al-Reaya since she was 13. “My father used it as a threat if I didn’t obey his sexual abuse,” she says, adding that girls and women may face the horrifying dilemma of deciding between Dar al-Reaya and staying in an abusive home.

“They make it impossible for others to help women fleeing abuse. I know a woman who was sentenced to six months in jail because she helped a victim of violence. Giving shelter in the case of a woman charged for ‘absenteeism’ is a crime in Saudi Arabia.

“If you are sexually abused or get pregnant by your brother or father you are the one sent to Dar al-Reaya to protect the family’s reputation,” she says.

Amina*, 25, says she sought refuge in a ‘care home’ in Buraydah, a city in central Saudi Arabia, after being beaten by her father. She says the building was “old, crumbling and unsettling” and the staff “cold and unhelpful”. They belittled her experience, says Amina, telling her other girls had it “far worse” and were “chained at home” and told her to “thank God my situation wasn’t that bad”

The next day, staff summoned her father, says Amina, but did little to protect her. “They asked both of us to write down our ‘conditions’. I requested not to be beaten or forced into marriage, and to be allowed to work. My father demanded that I respect everyone, never leave the house without permission, and always be accompanied by a male escort. I signed out of fear – I didn’t feel I had a choice.”

Once she returned home, Amina says the beatings continued and in the end she was forced to flee into exile. “I remember being utterly alone and terrified. I felt like a prisoner in my own home, with no one to protect me, no one to defend me. It felt like my life didn’t matter, like even if something terrible happened to me, no one would care,” she says.

For young girls, learning to fear Dar al-Reaya starts from a young age. Shams* says she was 16 when a woman who had been in one of the care homes was brought to her school. She told the class that she had started a relationship with a boy and was caught by the religious police and made to confess to her father. After she became pregnant her family disowned her and the father refused to allow her to marry, so she was sent to Dar al-Reaya. “She told us, if a woman has sex or a relationship she becomes a ‘cheap woman’. If you are a man you will always be a man, but if a woman makes herself cheap, she will be cheap for life.”

[borgqueens]

my heart bleeds everyday for the afghan girls and women. they are housebound and have to cover themselves up from top to bottom because they have to "avoid temptation or seduction". they are not allowed to speak in public or appear in public because it is deemed "too intimate." the women can’t look at men. suicide rates have skyrocketed because women and girls would rather be dead than to be a women in afghanistan. it’s not a sin to be a women.

women and girls are denied access to healthcare because they cannot be treated by male doctors, yet they are also barred from education and, therefore, cannot become doctors themselves. shops in afghanistan are even forced to cover up female mannequins. little girls live in fear of becoming child brides, but they dream of being poets, they would kill to get education.

a woman was disqualified from the olympics because she spread the message "free afghan women" at her breakdance performance. there must always be a relative male by their side like women were dogs being treated by their owner, except dogs have more rights than the women suffering.

we must raise awareness, do not look away. these women deserve the opportunities and the human rights that EVERY person does. they are talented, creative and intelligent but men are so scared. scared of women. the taliban tries to erase women. i’m sick. remember: it’s not islam or "just their culture", it is the radical government that feels threatened by women. do not look away.

[borgqueens]

God, I hope this is the last stupid take I have to see and respond to (it won't be) I want this to be a Harry Potter blog but...

"This is not a fund to ensure safety for abused women"

Correct - that would be Beira's Place, also run not as a charity but funded entirely through her own money.

"This is not a fund to assist women in providing essentials like clothing and food, this not a fund for women's education"

Correct - the Volant trust does a lot of work around women in poverty, single mothers and education, among other things. Along with Lumos and the Anne Rowling clinic, JKR has given away approximately £200 million of her own money to support such causes.

"This is a fund specifically to provide terfs with legal support in their endeavours to restrict the rights of trans women"

incorrect - this is a fund which allows women to mount challenges against businesses, places of work, councils etc where their legal right to a single sex space is not being met. Women need single sex spaces for a myriad of reasons but I will shorthand it as privacy, dignity and safety. Not giving women single sex spaces or services excludes women who - for whatever reason - cannot enter a mixed sex space or use a mixed sex provision. But they are entitled to those spaces in law and this fund makes sure women can fight so they are not unlawfully excluded and discriminated against.

It does not restrict the rights of trans women, because trans women do not have a legal right to be in female single sex spaces. They never did. They were just breaking the law and excluding women in the process.

If a trans identified male is legally entitled to enter a space, then this fun will not support women in restricting him.

This fund is about the correct application for the law as it pertains to women's rights to single sex spaces, provision and services.

STOP LYING

And stop encouraging trans identified men to break the law at the expense of women.

[borgqueens]

The Labour party doesn't know what a woman is when it comes to gender ideology but they know when it comes to shutting down it's own partys conference for women.

Ellie Reeves, Rachel Reeves and Angela Rayner at last year’s Labour conference. The women’s conference was scheduled to take place before the party’s conference in September. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau

Labour to cancel its women’s conference after supreme court gender ruling

Trans rights and gender critical campaigners criticise decision after party told it risks legal challenge if conference goes ahead

Jessica Elgot Deputy political editor Tue 20 May 2025

Labour is to cancel its national women’s conference and restrict all-women shortlists as it awaits full guidance from the equalities watchdog, sparking criticism from trans rights and gender critical campaigners.

The party’s governing body, the national executive committee (NEC) will meet on Tuesday to sign off plans to cancel the women’s conference, which was due to take place before the party’s annual conference in Liverpool in September.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s interim advice, published after the supreme court decision that the term “woman” in the Equality Act refers only to a biological woman, has suggested that voluntary organisations should apply that rule.

The NEC has been told the party is at risk of a legal challenge by going ahead with the conference, according to LabourList, and could face protests and direct action if the conference goes ahead as usual on the basis of self-identification.

Guidance to the NEC also advises that “all positive action measures relating to women in the party’s rules and procedures shall be interpreted on the basis of biological sex at birth. Guidance shall be issued to all party units and relevant stakeholders to this effect.

“The party will work with individuals and local parties affected by the judgment to resolve specific cases with sensitivity and compassion, acknowledging the significant effect the judgment will have had on many people.”

The gender critical group Labour Women’s Declaration said it was wrong to cancel the conference, calling it a “kneejerk reaction” and “incendiary action”. The conference acts as a policymaking body on particular issues affecting women.

“It would be exceptionally disappointing if our party, which strives to be a grown-up and serious political force, and a strong government, could not find the courage to run this conference as planned and run it in accordance with law which was introduced under a Labour government,” the group said. “Women deserve better.”

Cancellation of the conference is likely to be costly and the NEC document notes there are “impending contractual commitments for services in connection with the event that involve significant expenditure”.

Labour for Trans Rights and Pride in Labour issued a joint statement, also signed by the trans officer for LGBT+ Labour, condemning the changes and urging NEC members to vote against them.

“The Labour party must set an example and stand on the right side of history,” the statement said. It added that the proposals were “not effective ways to ‘clarify’ anything”.

“We would also question whether the exclusion of trans women from women’s conference is a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim, as trans issues have come up time and time again during the conference. This seems to completely remove trans people from that debate. It is a blatant attack on trans rights and is seemingly an attempt to isolate trans people even further within the Labour party and the labour movement more widely.”

LGBT+ Labour’s trans officer, Georgia Meadows, said: “Trans people are already greatly underrepresented in British politics, and if passed, this decision by the NEC will further harm trans people’s ability to engage with the democratic process and make them feel unwelcome at a time when the trans community is increasingly under attack.”

A Labour party source said the party would respect the supreme court judgment and would comply with statutory guidance once published. Ministers will consider the EHRC code of practice when a draft is submitted.

[borgqueens]

i read thru the whole 88 page judgment from the new UK supreme court decision and i need yall to understand how ABSURD it is that trans people are upset about this at all. long post but important bits highlighted in red bc i know everyone on this app has attention span issues

(context: (stick with me here)

1) the act sets out “it is discriminatory to exclude anyone on the basis of their sex.” and then a list of exceptions, so the single sex spaces/services allowed will be referred to as “exceptions” 2) the judge is looking at the whole act, and based on the language and context, deciding whether or not EVERY mention of “woman”, “man” or “sex” within the act was intended by parliament to include people with a gender recognition certificate or not. 3) we either can or cannot include people with a GRC. this is a discussion largely regarding single-sex services, it either includes TIMs with GRC and rejects TIFS with GRC or vice versa. that’s the most important factor and why it’s most absurd that trans people are upset about this.)

the main part that really stands out, one of the exceptions the judge relied on was regarding (paraphrased) “it would not make sense for a person of the opposite sex to need this service”. this refers to mainly medical treatments for sexed biology. not only does it not make sense for a TIM to need a service such as cervical cancer screening, but if we say this does include people with a recognized “female” gender, IT EXCLUDES TIFs. WHO ACTUALLY NEED THIS SERVICE.

Remember, we cannot make an exception for this specific kind of single-sex service - the word “sex” works just the same across the whole act. a judge cannot make amendments to the act, only interpret it, and it must be interpreted in context.

Even for a trans activist judge this would be a tricky spot to be in. it’s choosing between the “validity” of one trans-identified sex and the literal access to actually necessary healthcare for the other. this was made to protect those people and literally maintain their access to health services. Again, if we said this act was including people with a GRC, trans identified females would be excluded from countless necessary health facilities for women, vice versa.

alongside the gender recognition act, a grc still makes a trans identified person their desired gender for “all [other] purposes”, and the exceptions in the equality act are limited. mainly only government/healthcare services, maybe gyms (maybe), groups of under 25, higher education and communal accommodation. plus minus some.

it does not directly include bathrooms, (though they could be argued) but most certainly it does not mean “trans women are no longer women”. trans women are still literally “legally” women. all that’s really changed is an ability to recognise a difference between a “legal” female and a “biological” female, at this point only limited to within one act. that same act lists trans people as a protected group who MAY be discriminated against on the basis of their trans identity. trans women are legally women in literally every way besides within this one act. one exception to the rule "trans women are women".

this post is already super long but i might reblog it with some more things in the judgment that stood out to me later. also this was all written in one sitting so i might edit, forgive any typos or inaccuracies. i’m not registered and especially not in the UK so don’t take this as gospel or use as legal advice

[borgqueens]

people who say men and women are just innately different and complementary sure love to make sure women's part in it is to completely subsume themselves caring for others whereas men get to leave the house and have lives

[borgqueens]

'the bible is true'

okay so why is the bible true

'because the bible says it's true'

'trans women are women'

hm. okay why are trans women women?

'because they say that they're women!'

[borgqueens]

I don't get the point in being a Facts and Logic Atheist Skeptic if you're going to blatantly ignore the fallacies of the transgender ideology.

Everyone makes fun of the circular reasoning of Christians but no one makes fun of the very obvious circular reasoning of the trans movement. One of the reasons "what is a woman" is such a fantastic question is because they can't answer it. "What is a woman?" "A woman is someone who identifies as a woman." "Ok, well what is a that? When you "identify" as a woman, what does that mean?" It's very similar to asking a Christian "how do you know the Bible is true?" They say "the Bible is true because it's God's holy word." "Ok, well how do you know that?" "Because the Bible says."

Not only that, but transness in itself is an entirely spiritual belief. You're essentially trying to "fix" your body, which isn't even broken, to further reflect your soul. The idea of a soul is inherently spiritual. I find this especially true of nonbinary people who go through surgery and have their nipples removed. Many of them say "well, I wasn't supposed to have nipples" or "nipples make me dysphoric," and it doesn't make any sense. Nearly everyone on planet earth has nipples, what do you mean you weren't "supposed" to have them?

When you listen to trans people talk about their gender identity, it's extremely religious. Even with things like "trans joy," I can't help but think of the old sold "I've got the joy joy joy joy down in my heart." Well, I guess if JKR doesn't like it she can sit on a tack.

When they talk about their transition, they're "on a journey," they're "connecting with their gender." When they do finally transition, and cry because they "finally feel like their true selves."

What does that even mean? There is no "true" self, the self you currently have is your true self. You were never not yourself. You were never broken. Anyone who told you that you were was trying to sell you something.

The fact that most skeptic youtubers aren't even a little suspicious of this movements is very confusing to me. It's still possible they could be, but god forbid you say anything.

The trans community is one of the most toxic things I've ever been a part of. In my opinion, it's like Scientology on steroids. If you leave, you will lose friends, and you may become the victim of targeted harassment. If you even hint that you might be questioning it, you will be met with suspicion at best and outright hatred at worst.

In my opinion, it is one of the most popular, regressive and destructive cults currently operating in the US, and one of the reasons it's so dangerous is because it specifically targets mentally ill teenagers and gay kids. It sells the idea that something is wrong with them. It leads them down the path of medicalization and sterilization. In many ways, it's the modern day lobotomy.

This is the biggest medical scandal of our lifetime. If you're not at least a little bit skeptical, I worry for you.

[borgqueens]

can we please please please learn to differentiate between things that are good but devalued because of their association with women (caring for children, being compassionate), things that are neutral but seen negatively because of their association with women (the colour pink, having long hair), and things that are bad but associated with women because of misogyny (being materialistic, being stupid) because otherwise we’re gonna keep getting takes like “being gender nonconforming is anti feminist” and “not studying for your classes is feminist”

[borgqueens]

I absolutely adore how the easiest way to kill all men is simply by staying away from them and not caring about them. One man's life is depleted of female energy and he ends up contributing to male suicide stats. We don’t even need to go out and retaliate for revenge. We just need to ignore them and focus on ourselves and they end up dying naturally. It’s like the goddess universe wants us to relax and live in peace because she will take care of the male trash. How beautiful!

[borgqueens]

Feminism doesn’t need to include climate advocacy and animal rights, but these issues must include feminism.

Feminists need to focus on the material conditions of human females and liberate them as our first priority. Too often I see women with bleeding hearts exhaust themselves by trying to solve every problem on earth. Focus on your own wellbeing and the women around you first, always.

What I mean to say is that humanity cannot solve the climate crisis with the patriarchal system intact.

The patriarchy seizes power not only over women, but of all living things capable of fueling the patriarchy to multiply itself. Some second wave feminists have likened this phenomenon to the rape of the planet, but I choose to not use that language out of respect for women who have suffered rape that isn’t merely metaphorical.

The natural conclusion of patriarchy will be the complete destruction of all life. The planet will buckle under the pressure of sustaining all of the human beings men have chosen to inseminate women with.

At the heart of my feminism is that the meaning of human life is not found in reproduction. We should live in symbiosis with the people, animals, and nature around us. Patriarchy is based on exploitation so these ideals can never be achieved under it.

[borgqueens]

Seriously though why is the prostitution debate always surrounded by women’s choices? What about men’s choice to dehumanize a woman by literally purchasing her body for his own pleasure? What about the ancient demand of ownership of our bodies? Why do those get taken out of the equation when liberal feminists talk about rape culture + patriarchy?

[borgqueens]

this is a good article for the most part but imo misses the core issue even though one of the guys quoted lays it out pretty explicitly:

Paying for parasocial engagement saved Matthew from having to put himself out there. It’s funny, he says, how highly sexual he is online compared to how timid he is toward women in real life. “It made me give up on meeting someone,” he says of Chaturbate. “It was a safe place where I could get the same result, or so I thought, and not have to put in all that work.”

this is why I don't feel bad for men who claim the Male Loneliness EpidemicTM (not a real thing) "forces" them to turn to porn etc.: it's the other way around. they choose to seek out one-sided and/or transactional "relationships" with porn and online sex workers because they are completely uninterested in an actual relationship.

because an actual relationship requires work (everything from basic personal hygeine to listening skills to shared housework) -- work that to a healthy person is only occasionally dull because when you care about someone and find them interesting, there's pleasure in that work.

but to these men it all feels pointless and joyless because they do not care about women and it's not worth it to them. they don't want to have to listen to a woman talk about her day, let alone about her problems (especially not any problems she might have with him). they don't even want to engage with a woman face-to-face irl. they want a woman who cares only about them, and who doesn't ask them to care about her.

and then when their misogyny leads them into self-isolation, debt, and resentment, they turn around and say it was the fault of women all along. and then a whole society, including a lot of women, fall for it and ring the alarm over male loneliness: a problem created solely by men, and solvable only by men, which stems from misogyny and hurts women more than anyone else. it's such bullshit.

[borgqueens]

where are the real lesbians? this place is a sausage fest 😭

[borgqueens]

[borgqueens]

"People expect us to be small and quiet and innocent" Kim Petras makes every single one of his songs about being a whore, being a bitch, getting fucked, being an object in a female form and gets treated like a genius of pop industry and a queer icon. Ayesha Erotica made a song about a woman who enjoyed anal rape and is considered funny and silly despite an entire list of controversies. Lily Orchard known for SU video essay used to write graphic incest and pedophilic abuse MLP fanfiction in his TWENTIES. Ezra Miller - a "non binary" man - assaulted a child. Ethel Cain made religious abuse and incest his aesthetic and literally uses slurs and no one bats an eye. Hunter Schafer posted a psychopathic manifesto about how being a woman is being an object and everyone praises him. Chris Chan raped his mother and he's seen as a victim of bullying first. Eli erlick has a massive following on Tumblr despite being a rapist. You tried to close the Vancouver rape shelter leaving women escaping abuse basically homeless and everyone supported you. A man with several porn accounts with explicit urls got banned for posting said porn and ceo of Tumblr got harrassed for weeks over it. When jkr said trans males sent her porn and she didn't engage with them she got harrassed for "not taking action" despite her saying she literally reported said porn.

Who the fuck expects you to be dainty and demure? All you do is mock, harass and abuse women and the entire world save for like a couple women on Twitter finds an excuse for you. Shut the fuck up

[borgqueens]

I find the average rating on Goodreads is a pretty good indicator of the quality of a novel. Anything with an average lower than 3.75 is pretty much guaranteed to be garbage. Also a quick scan through the 1-star and 2-star ratings usually tips me off to any egregious sexism in the book.

Yeah reading is important, but it's hard finding a book even worthy of being read. Idk about y'all but I have standards. When I'm reading, I only want to read one by a female author, with a female protagonist, and one that isn't interested in males. Do you know how hard that is? I went through like 2 dozen books at the library today and only found a singular one I wanted to check out. And that's not even taking into account the quality of the book, which you can often times tell with the synopsis. It's exhausting.